Working pressure effecting combustion.

[dan_the_plumber]

You guys...lol 😉

 

[Msjc]

I had a NCS section on my portfolio back in july last year.

 

[Knappers]

I can consider the regs and the COP's and the BS's and choose not to comply as long as I can fully justify it and that would usually only mean I'd be exceeding their requirements in a different way, I could also take a disparity in those documents and use it to justify non compliance with one or the other.
For example, nowhere in the regs does it state that it's necessary for me to be gassafe registered to do gas work and quite possibly if I were a member of a professional trade association and kept completely up to date on the regs then I'd be beyond reproach and nobody would bother me (not advocating that, just a point!). People that get prosecuted are a danger to the public with no or little regard for the regulations that's not where i am!
I'm also a staunch supporter of gassafe 😳 but if you actually read through the regs there's allot of grey and sometimes you have to get your balls out!
They're also good for hiding behind and generating work for yourself 😱

Balance - that's the key!

 

[Msjc]

 

[Knappers]

Ah yes the version with guidance notes, but what does the official regulation say?
You've made my point well IMO
"The defence would like to submit the original unabridged version as evidence your honor",
"And his waste handlers licence"

I'm taking the Sod but still... - come on we couldn't all agree on how to class the original low working pressure issue, how black and white is this fking 'LAW'?

 

[Msjc]

The way i understand Reg 3(3) is that you are to be a member of a class of persons approved for the time being by HSE (gas safe) in order to work on gas.

The guidance makes it clearer. "all gas engineering businesses, including self-employed gas engineers are required to be in membership of a class of persons approved for the time being by the HSE (Gas Safe)"

 

[Knappers]

Yes and that is how I would choose to understand it too but it's not quite b&w is it?

 

[Msjc]

Yes and that is how I would choose to understand it too but it's not quite b&w is it?

Nope, you have to actually read it a few good times to decipher it.

 

[Knappers]

Well you could argue legaly that being of a class of persons or even 'a member of a class of persons' is a personal requirement, a level of class of the individual.
What it doesn't say is a member of an organisation or body.

I find the more times I read them the more 'if's, may's and reasonably practicable's I find

 

[Knappers]

Ooh 'should' that's a good one!